From: | David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Text Search vs MYSQL vs Lucene |
Date: | 2004-09-09 15:33:11 |
Message-ID: | 414077B7.5080808@zara.6.isreserved.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Steve Atkins wrote:
>>What would be performance of pgSQL text search vs MySQL vs Lucene (flat
>>file) for a 2 terabyte db?
>>thanks for any comments.
>
> My experience with tsearch2 has been that indexing even moderately
> large chunks of data is too slow to be feasible. Moderately large
> meaning tens of megabytes.
My experience with MySQL's full text search as well as the various
MySQL-based text indexing programs (forgot the names, it's been a while)
for some 10-20GB of mail archives has been pretty disappointing too. My
biggest gripe is with the indexing speed. It literally takes days to
index less than a million documents.
I ended up using Swish++. Microsoft's CHM compiler also has pretty
amazing indexing speed (though it crashes quite often when encountering
bad HTML).
--
dave
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-09-09 16:02:14 | Re: [JDBC] ERROR: canceling query due to user request |
Previous Message | Vivek Khera | 2004-09-09 14:27:35 | Re: How to determine a database is intact? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Wong | 2004-09-09 17:12:55 | Re: fsync vs open_sync |
Previous Message | Hervé Piedvache | 2004-09-09 14:56:01 | Re: TSearch2 and optimisation ... |